http://geer.tinho.net/geer.blackhat.6viii14.txt - some more technical analysis on what can be done
Another interesting site here is http://citizenlab.org/ and the idea of 'distributed security' they champion.
The End of the Internet Dream
181–190 of 212 posts
Re: The End of the Internet Dream
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
The web has done more to decentralize networked computing than any other technology, because the web is basically decentralized. Only the agreements (IETF and W3C) are somewhat centralized, but even then we are seeing a proliferation of REST APIs to encourage decentralized data management. These usually aren't exactly "RESTful" of course because we are so busy with our own startups we aren't really working towards in…
The web separates endpoints into two classes: the "land-owning" pays-for-a-domain-name server class, and the disenfranchised client class where users live. Interactions between users are necessarily mediated by a server, which is why the economics encourage centralization. You don't need "major parties" to "adhere to agreements" if users just use the software they like to interact with each other. The problem with th…
"The web separates endpoints into two classes: the "land-owning" pays-for-a-domain-name server class, and the disenfranchised client class where users live."
That's nonsense. Anyone can get a domain name for $5 and run a server for less. Users in the early web - usually not developers! - ran their own servers just fine.
The question is why they would want to? Especially given how big the web has become. They mostly would need applications that automated these details away for a broader purpose.
In fact many stil do run servers in their home in limited contests: their PVR, their backup appliance, their network printer, their Nest thermostat, heck even their Xbox with Twitch. It's all about the software application that warrants having your own server and makes it easy to maintain/run.
"Interactions between users are necessarily mediated by a server, which is why the economics encourage centralization. "
Its more than the interactions require software that needs to be written and evolved and maintained. A decentralized social network arguably has many benefits, that would lead to everyone buying something (software to run in their devices, or an appliance for their utility closet) to hook into it.
"You don't need "major parties" to "adhere to agreements" if users just use the software they like to interact with each other. "
The web IS all about agreements (protocols), as is the Internet. Decentralized execution of said agreements lead to emergent effects. Sure, if someone writes one piece of software, everyone by definition has agreement.
But the world of the network is about N versions of software written by different people and still achieving their ends.
Today we have cases of agreements enforced by single copies of software (Facebook) on a decentralized network with many many underlying differences in software (web servers, TCP stacks, firewalls, routers, databases). The only reason Facebook exists are the prior agreements made on those lower commodified layers, and economic value moves up the stack.
So why haven't we written the software and agreements to commodify Facebook? Because these things take time for the economic incentives to work. I believe it will happen, just a matter of time. The Web's architecture encourages decentralized sharing and manipulation of information, it's just incomplete.
" The problem with the Web is everyone using software on third-party servers to write rows in third-party databases because everything else is technically infeasible given the architecture of Web protocols."
What's the infeasible part? Where you see infeasibility, I just see "work in progress", or "incompletion".
"You need a DHT or some other kind of decentralized matchmaking service in order to actually connect users to each other."
Okay, there is a good idea for part of an implementation...
"At that point using HTTP makes no sense either,"
... And a bad one.
As an example - BitTorrent actually relies on HTTP and the web to bootstrap discovery to a tracker before moving to a an (optional) DHT. The web is an essential component of the puzzle.
"users don't have the time or resources to write complicated HTML or hire web devs to write it."
Why on earth would they need to? I can buy an appliance at Best Buy today that runs Wordpress for me. Why can't that evolve into something more sophisticated and compelling , that removes the need for centralized services?
I think you're way too hung up on this concept of a server being a socio-political construct rather than a transient architectural role in an interchange. Clients can be servers and vice versa. End users already run servers today, they just don't know it. The real socio-political construct of the Internet, the nexus of control, is the protocol. That's how you blow up centralized services.
Re: The End of the Internet Dream
#183This is one of my favorite topics because I have cause for hope. The story of internet centralization is one of network effects. Even though the internet connects every computer on the planet directly, finding people to interact in the ways we want is difficult. We post things to Facebook and Twitter because that's where our friends and like-minded strangers are actually looking for things. To fight this, we tried fe…
You're a smart guy who's thinking about the same kinds of things I am. How much do you like your day job?
I love my day job. I build decentralized software for a living. Always interested in talking to like-minded people, though. niran@niran.org
Re: The End of the Internet Dream
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery
Yes, I am familiar with the general concept of wage slavery. How does it apply to software engineers without applying to...basically anyone whose main income is not investment?
As LesZedCB points out, it does apply to everyone whose main income is the sale of their labor. Software engineers could be considered part of the [aristocracy of labor][0], but still part of the working class.
Re: The End of the Internet Dream
#185> • You won’t necessarily know anything about the decisions that affect your rights, like whether you get a loan, a job, or if a car runs over you. Things will get decided by data-crunching computer algorithms and no human will really be able to understand why. This isn't a change from the current state of things. For a hundred years, each of these decisions have been made by neural networks which we scarcely underst…
At least these are neural networks that we can hold accountable for their actions. Networks that exist in a single physical space easily detained when need be. Not to mention that they can usually explain their reasoning and behind a decision. Machine learning algorithms can't do that.
1) Holding someone accountable isn't actually useful unless it changes behavior.
2) They can come up with an explanation, but not usually an accurate one. We are used to giving offhand answers to neurology questions because parents angrily ask them of their children all the time. But the answers we give aren't truth-seeking they are punishment-avoiding.
Re: The End of the Internet Dream
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Patents and IP have lost their bite compared to the 80's isn't that what the tpp is supposed to fix?
No. Patents have lost their bite by expiring. TPP is not going to revivify any expired patents.
right but isn't it going to give the existing ones bigger teeth?
Re: The End of the Internet Dream
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
The web separates endpoints into two classes: the "land-owning" pays-for-a-domain-name server class, and the disenfranchised client class where users live. Interactions between users are necessarily mediated by a server, which is why the economics encourage centralization. You don't need "major parties" to "adhere to agreements" if users just use the software they like to interact with each other. The problem with th…
"The web separates endpoints into two classes: the "land-owning" pays-for-a-domain-name server class, and the disenfranchised client class where users live." That's nonsense. Anyone can get a domain name for $5 and run a server for less. Users in the early web - usually not developers! - ran their own servers just fine. The question is why they would want to? Especially given how big the web has become. They mostly w…
You're right that it's certainly within the financial means of anyone to run a web server; "class mobility" is not terribly difficult here. The problem is, as you state, that virtually nobody wants to have to administrate a server!
In-home devices which accept connections are not relevant as they are inaccessible without giving your home network a well-known name. Any device which is not accessible from the Internet at large is not meaningfully a part of the Internet--it's simply on a network. Of course, you can set up port forwarding and buy a domain so you can access these devices from the Internet, but that fundamentally changes the situation. This is really the important distinction here: "servers" have known names and addresses on the Internet and "clients" do not.
When you want to communicate with your friends, you do it by name or address; in the current model of the Internet as something 99% of people access via 3g on phones (with all kinds of network-side firewalling) or via their home router's dynamic IP and NAT, most users do not have any well-known address. The only way they can find their friends is by coordinating to both use some third party site. This is what it means for the current architecture of the web to encourage centralization: the most efficient way to let everyone find all their friends is for everyone to congregate at the same third-party location, i.e. Facebook.
We haven't moved away from that because the decentralized alternatives have tended to suck, requiring running your own server all the time at a fixed address; actual progress would involve eliminating servers entirely and replacing DNS with a distributed name-lookup service that's actually designed for this use-case, and then having your mutual friends play the role of mailservers when you and your peer are playing phone-tag and not simultaneously online.
Re: The End of the Internet Dream
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's nearly as grim as you make it out to be... it's just as easy to deploy a personal not-profit driven application/bulletin-board or whatever on Amazon, Linode, DigitalOcean, Azure and many others as it has EVER been to start a project and deploy it online. People are choosing to use Facebook, Twitter and other sites... that doesn't stop anyone from doing other things. That said, I think some governme…
People were choosing to drink heavily radioactive water in the early 20th century. People are choosing to take drugs that destroy their lives. When people chose something it doesn't mean they understand all the consequences. Especially since all the bad sides are conveniently hidden away in some tech, nerd stuff. People use Facebook because other people use Facebook. Simple as that. People haven't assessed all the fa…
As long as there is ability, and relatively common knowledge in order to create alternatives, there is less to fear. Natural monopolies aren't inherently bad so long as the ability to compete is preserved. That's just my opinion.
I don't think that the position that Facebook and Google in are inherently bad... but I do appreciate alternatives more than most. It comes down to freedom of information and accessibility of knowledge.
Re: The End of the Internet Dream
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know where those evil profits ultimately come from? People paying to have their needs satisfied. I make a decent living providing people with solutions to some of the problems described in this article (censorship and fragmentation) and I'm not ashamed to say I am driven purely by profit.
I think it's an often forgotten (perhaps purposefully to push an agenda in some circles?) part of these discussions about corporations and business models. They're just driven by demand. It's not some shady nebulous force at work trying to screw everything and everyone. Another problem, idealists often ignore the practical realities of a society when dreaming of their idealist visions for the future. Could the intern…
The important qualifier for "just driven by demand" and "People paying to have their needs satisfied" is that some demands/needs/desires are more profitable than others regardless of their long-term importance to a particular system. Just because people are willing to pay for something (e.g. a new gadget) doesn't make it more valuable than something they are not willing to pay for (e.g. clean drinking water for thousands of children). Just because the short-term-focused free market is producing economic activity that satisfies a demand doesn't mean that the system is either healthy or long-term sustainable, and that's the crux of the issue about the idealized Internet - its viability as a platform for human advancement (broadly defined) has been undermined by its corresponding suitability to support independent profit-making.
Re: The End of the Internet Dream
#190Again with this "there aren't as many women in computing/politics/NASCAR/mining industry as there should be" bullshit. I'll just paste previous comments because it's always the same irrational shit people like to vomit to get an audience. Why are there so few male manicures? Why so few male babysitters? Why so few female NASCAR drivers? Why so few female in the army? Why so few male in the wedding dress business? We…
> I'll just paste previous comments
No, please don't. On HN we try to optimize for signal/noise ratio. Pasted comments are noise.
Ideological venting is also noise. Regardless of your views, if you're going to comment on a divisive issue (or any issue), please don't do it like this here.